POST
|
Hi, You should be able to use the Error Inspector to view both Topology rule and validation attribute rule errors (although the Error Inspector may default to displaying Topology rule errors). To view attribute rule errors, you will need to ensure that you have added the error layers to the map. From the Error Inspector, select the Error Layers item from the Source drop-down menu. Here is a doc topic that walks through this process.
... View more
04-02-2024
12:32 PM
|
0
|
1
|
467
|
POST
|
Hi, Can you share some additional details on the workflow/environment that you configured your Evaluate Polygon Perimeter and Area check? Was the validation attribute rule created manually from the Ready to Use Rules gallery or exported/imported from a Reviewer Batch Job file. The geodatabase type and the spatial reference of input dataset This would be helpful in troubleshooting Thanks!
... View more
03-19-2024
01:38 PM
|
0
|
0
|
427
|
POST
|
Thanks-much for sharing the details of your configuration! There appears to be an issue during evaluation when a dataset contains multiple Query Attributes-based rules and one of those rules contains an Attribute Filter. The development team has been able to reproduce this behavior and have logged a bug to address the issue. Thanks again for the heads-up!
... View more
03-07-2024
02:26 PM
|
0
|
0
|
468
|
POST
|
Hi, Can you share some additional details on how you have configured your Query Attributes checks? For example, the type of geodatabase used, filters (Subtype, Attribute) and Search Goal configuration would be helpful in troubleshooting. Thanks!
... View more
03-05-2024
03:47 PM
|
0
|
1
|
482
|
IDEA
|
@cordtsraThanks for the clarification. The Table to Table Attribute check requires that the data source referenced by the Features/Rows to Compare parameter must include a global ID field. Can you confirm that your table include a global ID?
... View more
02-26-2024
10:45 AM
|
0
|
0
|
431
|
IDEA
|
@cordtsra wrote: I am currently working on converting RBJs to Attribute Rules. One issue I noticed is that I can't run a standalone check, or a composite check with a non-spatial table. I can create attribute rules for the non-spatial table, but there is no way to run those rules as you cannot add error layers for that table. Also, if I want to reference the non-spatial table in another feature class's attribute rules it doesn't appear in the drop down. For clarification, which Data Reviewer check(s) are you trying to use with your table?
... View more
02-26-2024
08:43 AM
|
0
|
0
|
447
|
POST
|
Not Arcade, but Data Reviewer's Feature on Feature check can be used to implement a validation attribute rule which identifies the above scenario (spatial relationship: intersects, Compare Attributes: Network Level ≠ Network Level). Unfortunately, the same check used as a constraint attribute rule lacks the ability to compare attributes of features that intersect.
... View more
02-23-2024
02:34 PM
|
1
|
0
|
182
|
DOC
|
The January 2024 product roadmap for ArcGIS Data Reviewer is now available!
... View more
01-17-2024
01:40 PM
|
0
|
0
|
747
|
DOC
|
ArcGIS Data Reviewer provides capabilities that enable you to automate and simplify data quality workflows that lower data management costs and create high quality data. The purpose of the ArcGIS Data Reviewer Roadmap is to provide an estimate of when new capabilities will be released in the future. By following this roadmap, we will be continuously improving the capabilities of ArcGIS Data Reviewer, meeting the evolving needs of users and providing a powerful and efficient solution for managing data quality. What would you like to see next in ArcGIS Data Reviewer? Feel free to share your thoughts in the ArcGIS Data Reviewer Ideas board. Near-term goals Near-term goals include those capabilities planned for the next couple of releases of ArcGIS Pro and ArcGIS Enterprise. These include expanding Data Reviewer’s data quality control capabilities available in attribute rule-based workflows and support for exploratory/ad hoc assessment of data quality in ArcGIS Pro. Near-term goals for ArcGIS Data Reviewer For automated review of features, these goals include expanding and simplifying data quality control capabilities integrated in attribute rules. This includes a redesign of the Valency check that addresses usability and discoverability of this unique form of data validation. Expanding support for Z-enabled features in Data Reviewer checks begins with an update to the commonly used Feature on Feature check. This update will enable you to include feature Z-values when assessing its spatial relationship with other features. To support data migration workflows, Data Reviewer’s series of linear-referenced event checks (Event on Event, Find Event Gaps, Find Event Overlaps, Find Orphan Events, and Invalid Event Measures) will be updated to support evaluation of features stored in file and mobile geodatabases. Near-term goals for automated review workflows Another area of focus in the near term will be to expand support for semiautomated review of data in attribute rule-based workflows. Semiautomated review assesses data quality using methods that typically involve human interaction and input. This includes enhancements in ArcGIS Enterprise to support visual review of features using ArcGIS Pro (with the Flag Missing Features and Browse Features tools), web applications (created using either the ArcGIS Experience Builder or the ArcGIS Maps SDK for JavaScript), and support for managing errors derived from 3rd-party tools and workflows. Near-term goals for semiautomated review workflows Another near-term goal is to improve management of errors resulting from both automated and semiautomated data review. The main objectives are to simplify error management tasks by automating the retention of corrected/verified error records and enhancing the data correction workflows using the Error Inspector in ArcGIS Pro. In ArcGIS Enterprise, the Validation Service will be enhanced to support the life cycle management of error results created during semiautomated data reviews. Near-term goals for error management workflows Last, but not least, users have been asking for the ability to assess data quality outside of attribute rule-based workflows. Typical use-cases for this form of data review include exploratory assessment of data received from outside sources, data stored in different formats (shapefiles, traditional versioned enterprise geodatabases, feature services), or evaluation of features in automated workflows created using either Geoprocessing or the ArcGIS API for Python. Near-term goals for ad hoc data validation Mid-term goals Mid-term goals include those capabilities planned for subsequent releases. These include: Automated reporting that provides transparency into data quality Automation for the creation of constraint/validation attribute rules Expanded support for evaluating the quality of Z-enabled features In ArcGIS Pro, enhancements to the Error Inspector include support for exporting error features to Excel and extending attribute filtering to include additional error properties (such as error title, error source). Mid-term goals for ArcGIS Data Reviewer Long-term goals Long-term goals are those features in the roadmap that have not been assigned to a specific release. These include support for automated review for ArcGIS Online hosted features services, automated review for 3D object features, and error correction workflows. Long-term goals for ArcGIS Data Reviewer Summary As with any roadmap, capabilities are tentative and may evolve, be delayed, or removed from the roadmap as priorities change. The continued development or release is at the sole discretion of Esri. For more information on the latest release of ArcGIS Data Reviewer see the What’s New in ArcGIS Data Reviewer blog.
... View more
01-17-2024
01:36 PM
|
3
|
0
|
1241
|
POST
|
How about deleting the attribute rules in the exported feature/object classes (followed by deleting the error layers)? Delete Attribute Rule (Data Management)
... View more
11-16-2023
09:33 AM
|
0
|
0
|
680
|
POST
|
Not Arcade, but Data Reviewer's Regular Expression check can be used to create a validation attribute rule that identifies text values that don't match email/telephone formatting. There are lots of great regular expression examples on the web supporting common formatting. Here is one source.
... View more
11-13-2023
09:00 AM
|
0
|
0
|
338
|
POST
|
I'd suggest reviewing the configuration of the Find Dangles and Orphan checks (using ArcMap) to determine if the optional Include additional features in comparison parameter is being used. Including additional data sources when identifying features with dangles will impact performance.
... View more
11-03-2023
01:22 PM
|
0
|
0
|
806
|
POST
|
You might want to start your investigation by identifying those rules in the Reviewer Batch Job that are taking the most time to complete. Reviewing the contents of the log file that is created when running the Execute Reviewer Batch Job geoprocessing tool is a good place to start. The file is stored in the %localappdata%\Esri\DataReviewer folder and will contain summary messages of the rules run when using the tool. On a related note, this tool was directly migrated from ArcMap to ArcGIS Pro. It is provided to enable users in a mixed desktop environment (ArcMap and ArcGIS Pro) to work together. I would suggest evaluating Data Reviewer's "native" data validation capabilities for those organizations who are migrating to ArcGIS Pro.
... View more
10-31-2023
08:59 AM
|
1
|
2
|
827
|
POST
|
As @PaulinaKarkauskaite pointed-out, some of the basic tools used in visual QC review are already available in ArcGIS Pro and there are additional tools planned for future releases. That said, I'd be interested in getting feedback on QC requirements your customer envisions needing after their migration to ArcGIS Pro. This input would help the team ensure that Pro-based workflows reflect current needs of data production workflows and improve over those created in the past. Feel free to send me a message if you'd like to schedule a meet-up!
... View more
09-14-2023
03:25 PM
|
0
|
0
|
749
|
POST
|
You might want to investigate the use of an input filter on this check. Filters can be applied to the Find Dangles check to only evaluate those features within a specific geodatabase subtype (Subtype parameter) and/or features that match a SQL WHERE clause (Attribute parameter).
... View more
09-08-2023
04:43 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1028
|
Title | Kudos | Posted |
---|---|---|
1 | 08-30-2024 09:26 AM | |
1 | 02-23-2024 02:34 PM | |
1 | 10-31-2023 08:59 AM | |
1 | 02-24-2023 03:04 PM | |
1 | 01-25-2023 10:58 AM |
Online Status |
Offline
|
Date Last Visited |
2 hours ago
|